'Pro-Feminist' Depictions of Female on Male Rape: American Horror Story's
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Problematising ‘Pro-Feminist’ Depictions of Female on Male Rape: American Horror Story’s ‘Rape of the Monsignor’ ABSTRACT: Dramatised depictions of female-on-male rape, in inverting the conventional gendered rape binary of male assailant/female victim, are commonly regarded as subverting gender norms, and are thus celebrated as pro-feminist. I present a Foucauldian problematisation of this rationale - arguing that, through a process of over-writing gender, inversion of the norm masks a reversion to the norm. To interpret this as pro-feminist, one must be distracted by corporeal gender in the superficial role reversal, and blind to the anti-feminist effects in operation. Critical discourse analysis of an example drawn from the popular US television show American Horror Story illustrates that such depictions operate in discursive space as the locus for a process of ‘governmentalised recursion’. A close reading of the media text, and its audience reception is performed, methodological considerations in the intersection of feminist analyses and cultural criminology, vis a vis gendered lacunae and popular misinterpretation, are discussed, and the primacy of scenographic analysis is challenged via a focus on ‘the arc’. This piece thus contributes an intervention in the discourse predicated on a Foucauldian triangulation of media texts, audience responses and institutional frameworks and practices, to comprise a ‘history of the present’ in a controversial and neglected area. KEYWORDS Male Rape; Female Sexual Offenders; Foucault; American Horror Story; Critical Discourse Analysis; Feminism; Cultural Criminology; Rape Myths; Narrative Arc; Governmentality 1 INTRODUCTION ‘I want to see films about men getting raped by women...I want to see the camera linger on the look of terror in his eyes when he suddenly realises that the woman is bigger, stronger and far more brutal than he’ (Sullivan, n.d, cited in Brownmiller, 1975: 303). Compared with the lacuna implied in the above excerpt, dramatised depictions of male victims of female sexual assailants are now frequently on our screens, in mainstream television and cinema,1 with examples roundly claimed and celebrated by populist feminism as the ‘pro-woman commentary’ that Brownmiller and her contemporaries asserted they would be.2 But contrary to this interpretation, I assert that this trend should not be welcomed. Commonsense tells us that female on male rape inverts the conventional gendered rape binary, and thus ‘turns the tables’ (Gavey, 2005) to undermine and subvert patriarchy3 and disrupt patriarchal rape culture4 - such that this has become emblematic of, and indeed 1 Most commonly in comedy and horror genres, see XXXX, 2014. Beyond the many examples highlighted in that analysis, also resonant – and noteworthy due to their prime-time scheduling, mainstream distribution, and popularity in syndication and/or secondary media sales - are : TV F/M Dollhouse(2009-2010, multiple examples), True Blood (2011, female gang rape of Jason Stackhouse), Desperate Housewives (2009, rape of Orson by his ex-wife Alma), Buffy the Vampire Slayer (1999, rape of Xander by Faith; 2000, rape of Riley by Faith); Lost Girl (multiple examples), and F/M sexualised violence and murder in Scream Queens (2015-2016) and Ash versus the Evil Dead (2015-2018); as well as F/M rape and/or sexualised violence/murder in the back- catalogue of various popular music artists, such as music videos for No Doubt’s ‘It’s my Life’ (2003), Britney Spears’ Toxic (2003), Pink ‘Please Don’t Leave Me’ (2008), Lady Gaga ‘Paparazzi’ (2009), Lady Gaga and Beyonce’s ‘Telephone’ (2009), and Rhianna ‘Bitch Better Have My Money’ (2016). Interestingly, where F/M does occur in such forms, it tends to result in ‘repeat offending’ by artists and/or directors, pointing to popular reception of this theme and related tropes. A thematic trend of importance here, consistent with my previous findings, is the convenient use of rape-revenge logics as providing the recurrent framing, for a discussion of the implications of this, see xxx (2014). 2 See analyses and discussion board responses to various iterations of female sexual violence against males in popular online feminist magazines such as: Bitch, Feministing, Jezebel, and the now archived xoJane. 3 Understood in Foucauldian terms as a ‘regime of truth’ that produces an asymmetric power-effect tied to the existing apparatus of sexuality, and predicated on gender. 4 Understood in Foucauldian terms as established knowledges (collective, taken for granted beliefs that are orthodox, commonsense, truisms) which result in normalization regarding the rape of women. 2 symbolic of, resistance; but one should question whether this is really the positive, pro- feminist intervention that it is commonly assumed to be. Indeed, from a Foucauldian positioning, accepting his triad of knowledge/power/individuation, one must. Thus, this piece will demonstrate that the supposed inversion here, in actuality, disingenuously masks a reversion to the norm, and as such, extends an invitation for feminist theorists to exercise ‘vigilance’ (Projansky, 2001) and the responsibility that this entails.5 As a Foucauldian6, I know that gendered knowledges underpin governmentality;7 I understand that discursive power formations reproduce themselves, frequently through supposed rejection;8 and I appreciate that superficial discontinuity belies an underlying constancy.9 Foucault’s corpus indicts that power relations are comprised of a matrix of discourses and discursive practices, that are not enforced, but are dispersed throughout the social body; that these operate in complex and confounding ways, and that we are each complicit in their perpetuation. These are reified through social practices – be they ever so well meaning. In sum: I’m aware that the road to hell is paved with good intentions and I’m wary of (pyrrhic) victory. As Foucault cautions, ‘people know what they do, they frequently 5 Projansky (2001, p. 3) cautions that ‘there is a need to be vigilant...about identifying and challenging depictions of rape’, not least in order to intervene in the discourse and to enable activism. 6 Besides the relevance for Foucauldian analysis, it is also relevant for feminist analysis, and could be argued to lend itself to ‘sadomasochistic transformability’ a’la Chancer (1992), amongst others; however, such approaches are beyond the scope of this thesis. 7 Foucault conceptualises power as productive, operating in complex and confounding ways, with ‘the subject’ its vehicle rather than its target or point of application. Governmentality is an understanding not of the mentalities of governance per se, or a top-down configuration, but a recognition that power is ‘blind’ and ‘impotent’ (Foucault, 1996, cited in Lazzarato, 2002) and that we are all implicated in its dispersal and deployment. These are amongst the key points of departure for this theorist vis a vis his contemporaries. For a far more detailed discussion of this concept, its implications and resultant methodologies, see XXX (2014). 8 Such that ‘irony’ was coined by Jock Young to characterise what is commonly regarded as the ‘post-modern turn’ in criminology (see Young, 2002). Informed by my own interpretation of Foucault’s works, I regard ‘irony’ simply as unintentional, negative consequences. This is an important running theme in Foucault’s corpus, and in my own work. 9 Foucault (2001, p.226) cautions that changes in articulation are disingenuous in masking an underlying constancy. It is incumbent upon us therefore to appreciate that ‘to recognise a discontinuity is never anything more than to register a problem that needs to be solved’. 3 know why they do what they do, but what they don’t know is what what they do does’ (Foucault cited in Dreyfus and Rabinow, 1982:187). This thesis is progressed through three interwoven elements, constituting a Foucauldian Triangulation,10 with a rebuttal of the popular assumption that ‘inversion = resistance’ forming the core. Instead, ‘inversion = reversion’ will be demonstrated. Contiguous to this central concern, a twofold misunderstanding that limits academic interlocutors in this area is identified and challenged: firstly, the privileging of ‘the body’ as the focus of analyses, with, secondly, the associated assumption that on-screen sexual violence is ‘literalised’ (Boyle, 2005: 138) and can therefore be adequately excavated through application of ‘scenographic’ analysis. In so doing, this piece acts as a contribution to feminist theory and to cultural criminology by extending and complexifying existing concepts and methodology. It also adds to the literature11 at the cultural criminology/Foucault intersection, and contributes an original analysis of an example of a neglected phenomenon in criminology and related fields - on-screen female sexual offending against male victims. A Foucauldian problematisation of the issue is performed, in seeking to ‘think differently’ about the predominant truth claim. This entails conscientiously striving to resist the established ways of seeing - rebelling against orthodoxies, conventions and taken for granted 10 Foucault rejected the notion of three separate domains, instead recognising three types of ‘relationship’ that ‘always overlap one another, support one another reciprocally, and use each other mutually as a means to an end’ (Foucault, 2001, p338). My triangulation is largely inspired by, and builds upon Mendieta’s (2002) essay, and is delineated in detail in XXXX (2014, see p43, amongst